Pages

Randy Bakke's Closing Statement

November 17, 2010

Randy
Bakke reminded the jury that it was Jim Long's burden of proof he was fired
because he filed for whistleblower protection.
He reiterated Judge Goodman's instructions that Long had to prove three
things: 1) that he be engaged in
protected activity; 2) that WSI took adverse action against him; and 3) that a
causal connection existed between his protected activity and his firing. Bakke told the jury there was a lot of
evidence that Jim Long filed for whistleblower protection because he was trying
to save his job.

Bakke
said that most of Long's complaints had already been dispensed with and that
while there is a discussion of a culture at WSI, the jury needed to focus on
the lack of illegality or violations of law in Long's complaints. He further said that they have full
documentation in this case, that there is no he said, she said.

Bakke
noted that Long said there were no negative references in his personnel
file. He said that was because the
personnel review that Halvorson had conducted of Long was done only 6 weeks
after Halvorson became interim CEO.
Since he'd only been supervising Long 6 weeks, he did not have adequate
information. Bakke further said that no
anonymous information is allowed into a personnel file. Therefore, the butt slapping report would not
go into that file. He said the law also
says an administration may keep separate notes from the personnel file for
possible action.

Bakke
told the jury that they heard Tuntland say that Sandy Blunt had fabricated his
handwritten side file, but said that Blunt had well before that had problems
and complaints about Long and Peltz.

Bakke
explained the side file to the jury in this way, he said imagine someone
develops a drinking problem, he gets good reviews up until that point, but you
can't put that information in the file because you can be sued for putting that
information in the file.

Bakke
framed Long's complaint as throwing spaghetti against the wall to see what will
stick. He cited exhibit 17, the letter
from John Halvorson to WSI employees saying that if they were contacted by
Highway Patrol it would be there personal choice whether or not to speak with
law enforcement. Bakke said there was
nothing wrong with that.

Regarding
the State Auditor's report that there was a culture of retaliation at WSI,
Bakke said Halvorson wasn't CEO at that time.

He said
that Long claimed he filed his whistleblower protection request to keep from
being retaliated against. In fact, Bakke
said, everything was already in place to fire him before he filed that
complaint. He cited the audio tapes
where Long told Peltz he knew his job was in jeopardy. He cited an email from Evan Mandigo telling
Long to change the way he dealt with Halvorson and an email Long had sent to
Grinsteinner. This exchange showed that
Long knew Halvorson did not trust him and that his judgment was in
question. Bakke said that showed Long
knew there were employment problems well before he filed.

Bakke
reiterated there was nothing illegal, there was no violation of law, and
everything Long complained about had already been dealt with. He said Long did not make these complaints
until he filed his whistleblower protection request, which he said Long did to
save his job. If the complaints had been
valid, he would have put something in writing before 10-22-07, but that was
when he saw he could undermine John Halvorson.

He
referred to the risk management whistleblower complaint that Jim Long said he
did not own because it was not signed.
It dealt with the tape recording issue but it did not deal with any
illegalities.

Bakke
asked did Long ever contact law enforcement before 10-17-07. No, he only did it because he was having
employee conflicts.

Bakke
said there were many legitimate reasons for terminating Long. First an inappropriate relationship with
Billie Peltz, which was confirmed by an eye witness.

Then
there was the issue surrounding the ITTP project, which Bakke said Long blamed
solely on Halvorson. Bakke pointed out
that Justin Data had in his letter stated there were problems above and below
Jim Long. Therefore, he could not have
been talking about Halvorson.

He said
Long went behind Halvorson's back and tried to sabotage him.

Then he
brought up the issue of impeachment. He
said if Long was Pinocchio on the stand, his nose would have been at the door.

With
regard to the Armstrong journal, he referred to the investigation conducted by
Rob Forward. In that report, Long said
that Grinsteinner found the journal and gave it to him. Bakke pointed out that Long had an
opportunity to correct Forward's report and sign it, but did not. But Mike Quinn's report, taken just 2 days
after the event occurred, stated Long informed Quinn he had retrieved the
journal, that he had no authority to look at it, and that he found it in
Armstrong's desk drawer. Bakke then
turned to Long's testimony in front of this jury where he testified he did not
search through anybody's desk and was not involved when Grinsteinner found the
journal. Bakke stated that this
differing testimony suggested Long is not reliable.

Bakke
talked about the Chamber of Commerce meeting and again pointed out that Long
had never complained of that until he filed his whistleblower complaint. He attacked Long's allegation that Halvorson
and Blunt had admitted there was something illegal about the proposed letter
writing campaign. Bakke said that Bjornson
had indeed advised him of the Hatch Act, but said that would only apply to
fundraising for election activities and there were no election activities going
on at that time. Bakke said that after
Long voiced concerns to Bjornson about the Chamber of Commerce activities, he
went to Strevak at Republican Headquarters and hand-delivered the WSI
information to him. Would he have done
that if he thought it was a violation of law?

Bakke
noted that Long raised concerns about the State Auditor's Report, but that
report was completed in October of 2006, a year before Long filed his report. The same with Long's complaint about the 4%
WSI pay increase. That issue had been
resolved many months before Long complained.
With regard to Dave Spencer's sick leave, that issue also had been
resolved before his complaint. Bakke
then went into a detailed timeline to demonstrate Long had not been fired
because he filed a whistleblower complaint.

December
2006 Nallie accuses Long and Peltz of
having an affair.

March
2007 A complaint was brought to Sandy
Blunt regarding the touching incident.

April 18,
2007 Sandy Blunt is charges with felonies.
John Halvorson appointed interim CEO.

April 19,
2007 Long meets with Indvik saying he is more qualified to be the CEO. Indvik says 90% of the staff would have
left.

April 23,
2007 Wahlin finds there is no violation of the nepotism statute in Halvorson's
appointment, but Long still includes that in his whistleblower complaint.

May 7,
2007 Halvorson meets with Long regarding
perceptions of an inappropriate relationship with Peltz.

June 13,
2007 Halvorson completes Long mid year
performance.

June 15,
2007 ICF report says WSI employees do
not respect the senior leaders in support services.

August
30, 2007 Long is reprimanded for tape
recording Nallie and Hutchings. He files
his first whistleblower complaint the same day saying he should not have been
reprimanded.

August
31, 2007 Long records conversations with
Peltz and Ripplinger. Says he'll start
to play dirty to see if he can get Halvorson to crack and start applying
external pressure by going to the media via Chad Nodland.

September
24, 2007 Long writes board members
Mandigo and Ballweber that Justin Data's concerns were solely with
Halvorson. Bakke says that Data did not
say that. This email was not cc'd to
Halvorson.

September
24, 2007 through October 3, 2007
Halvorson meets with Bjornson about terminating Long.

October
3, 2007 Halvorson emails HR specialist
Hunter Lott.

October
4, 2007 Halvorson talks on the phone
with Lott.

October
11, 2007 Halvorson and Bjornson meet
with North Dakota AG's Tag Anderson about terminating Long.

Bakke
said he didn't understand why Kay Grinsteinner was called and that she did not
say Long reported anything illegal. He
said her testimony was a non-factor in this case.

Bakke
said there were clearly legitimate reasons for termination.

He then
went over the form the jury would be filling out.

Question
1: Has the Plaintiff shown by the
greater weight of the evidence that he engaged in protected whistleblower
activity?

Bakke
said that if the jury's answer to that question was no, then the case was over.

Question
2: Has the Plaintiff shown by the
greater weight of evidence that Defendants terminated his employment because he
engaged in protected whistleblower activity?

Bakke
said their answer to that question should be no because they had a history of
problems with Long.

Bakke
concluded by telling the story of Don Quixote who became obsessed with doing
deeds of chivalry. He said Long was
jousting and lancing at windmills that he thought were giants. He said Long made up claims to make himself
into the shining knight for his Dulcinea, who was Billie Peltz.

CeaseSPIN.org News Quality Rating System

Top 40 Best Documentaries

About Me

Sue Wilson tells important stories which move politicians to act. She is the Emmy winning director of the media reform documentary "Broadcast Blues" and editor of SueWilsonReports.com.
Broadcast Blues sets its sights on media policy, and www.SueWilsonReports.com turns a critical eye on the media itself.
She recently formed an activist site, http://www.MediaActionCenter.net